BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, SIRSA.
Consumer Complaint no. 263 of 2020.
Date of Institution : 20.10.2020.
Date of Decision : 16.10.2024.
Anil Kumar aged about 37 years son of Rameshwar Dass, resident of village Nuhianwali, Tehsil Kalanwali District Sirsa.
……Complainant.
Versus.
1. Sarv Haryana Bank Odhan, Tehsil Kalanwali, District Sirsa through its Manager.
2. Oriental Insurance Company, Opposite Janta Bhawan Sirsa through its Manager being Insurer of the complainant.
3. Oriental Insurance Company Ltd., LIC Building (2nd Floor) Jagadhri Road, Ambala Cantt., Haryana- 133001 through its Regional Officer of the Haryana Region.
...…Opposite parties.
Complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019.
BEFORE: SH. PADAM SINGH THAKUR ………………PRESIDENT
SMT. SUKHDEEP KAUR …………………MEMBER
Present: Sh. B.S. Yadav, Advocate for complainant.
Sh. M.S. Sethi, Advocate for opposite party No.1.
Sh. A.S. Kalra, Advocate for opposite party no.2.
ORDER
The complainant has filed the present complaint under Section 35 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 against the opposite parties (herein after referred as Ops with the averments that he is an agriculturist and has agricultural land in village Nuhianwali and Rajpura, District Sirsa and has mortgaged his land with op no.1 under Kissan Credit card scheme of the Government. That complainant applied for Fasal Bima Yojna as per scheme of the Government and paid premium of Rs.759.40 and 1506.23 on 13.12.2018 for insurance of his cotton crop. It is further averred that in May, 2019 the farmers of village Rajpura including his brother were given claim for the loss/ damage of their cotton crop but the complainant was not paid a single penny despite the fact that his crop was also damaged and thereafter he came to know reason of non receiving the claim i.e. wrong entry of village on portal. The op no.1 is responsible for uploading wrong entry of village on portal and ops no.2 and 3 are responsible for non rectification of the entry on portal and they have caused unnecessary harassment and financial loss to the complainant. Hence, this complaint seeking claim amount of Rs.77,153.76 alongwith interest and also compensation and litigation expenses.
2. On notice, ops appeared. Op no.1 filed written statement raising certain preliminary objections. It is submitted that complainant has mortgaged his land situated at village Rajpura with answering op vide mortgaged deed no. 505 dated 26.04.2012. The complainant has never applied for insurance of his crops rather as per instruction of Pardhan Mantri Fasal Bima Yojna, an amount of Rs.2933/- has been debited in the account of complainant and transferred the same to op no.2 as premium to insure the Kharif 2018 crops of complainant. Similarly, an amount of Rs.759.40 has been debited in the account of complainant on 31.12.2018 and transferred the same to op no.2 to insurance the Rabi 2019 crops of complainant. The op no.2 has not raised any objection in this regard nor refunded the said premium within two months from its acceptance, hence op no.2 is liable to compensate the complainant for any loss to his crops as op no.2 accepted the premium and has not raised any objection as per clause 19 (xxii) of Haryana Govt. notification dated 30.03.2018 and has never refunded the premium. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
3. Ops no.2 and 3 also filed written statement raising preliminary objections. It is submitted that present complaint is liable to be dismissed as there is no insurance of crop of complainant of village Rajpura. The bank has uploaded the name of village as Nuhianwali instead of village Rajpura and this mistake has never been corrected by the bank or farmer within the stipulated period on the portal. There was no natural calamity or loss to the cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 of village Nuhianwali uploaded by the banker of complainant, which got the insurance coverage by giving and uploading the particulars of village Nuhianwali on NCIP portal and as such insurance company cannot be held liable for payment of damage, if any and only bank is responsible for said mistake as per operational guidelines of PMFBY. Remaining contents of complaint are also denied to be wrong and prayer for dismissal of complaint made.
4. The complainant in evidence has tendered his affidavit Ex. CW1/A and documents Ex. C1 to Ex.C5.
5. On the other hand, op no.1 has tendered affidavit of Sh. Jitesh Wadhwa, Branch Manager as Ex. RW1/A and statement of account Ex.R1. Ops no.2 and 3 have tendered affidavit of Sh. Sanjay Aggarwal, Incharge Legal as Ex. RW2/A and documents Ex.R2/1 and Ex.R2/2.
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file.
7. The complainant is alleging that on 13.12.2018 premium amounts of Rs.759.40 and Rs.1506.23 were deducted by op no.1 for insurance of his crop under PMFBY scheme with ops no.2 and 3 and complainant is seeking insurance claim for the damage of his cotton crop of 2018-2019 whereas the cotton crop is sown in Kharif season i.e. in May-June of every year whereas according to complainant premium was deducted in the month of December, 2018 during which period there is wheat crop in the fields and as such complainant himself is not sure that whether he is claiming for cotton crop and of which season or of wheat crop. Even if it is assumed that due to inadvertent mistake, it has been mentioned that premium was deducted on 13.12.2018 whereas claim of complainant pertains regarding damage of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 for which premium was also deducted by op no.1 bank but in that eventuality also there is nothing on file to prove any loss to his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 because complainant has not placed on file any report of loss of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 and there is also no report of any loss of his wheat crop of Rabi 2018-2019 for which premium was deducted on 13.12.2018. Though complainant has placed on file copy of statement of account of his brother Subhash Chander as Ex.C2 from which it is evident that on 03.05.2019 he has received insurance claim of Rs.77,153.76 being PMFBY claim but it is not proved on record that for which season of crop he received said claim amount on 03.05.2019. Even if it is presumed that said claim amount was received by brother of complainant for the loss of his cotton crop of Kharif, 2018 as premium was deducted from his account on 31.07.2018, even then it is not clear that as to for how much of land, the brother of complainant received such claim amount. The complainant has not even mentioned that how much agricultural land he owns. Further more, he has also not proved on record that what was actual yield of cotton/ wheat crop in kharif, 2018, Rabi 2018-2019 in village Rajpura and what was threshold yield of these crops in above said seasons which is the basic requirement to prove any loss to the crops as per operational guidelines of PMFBY and as such complainant is not entitled to any claim for loss of any of the above said crops due to above said shortcomings in the case of complainant.
8. In view of our above discussion, we do not find any merit in the present complaint and same is hereby dismissed but with no order as to costs. A copy of this order be supplied to the parties as per rules. File be consigned to the record room.
Announced. Member President,
Dated: 16.10.2024. District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Commission, Sirsa.
